WSJ: Current state law prohibits home brewers from transporting any beer or wine they make at home. The bill passed on a 32-1 vote would change that and allow them to make beer or wine outside their home. It now moves to the Assembly.
The bill would also exempt home brewers from permit requirements and taxes as long as they don't make more than 100 gallons for one person in a household or 200 gallons for two people in a household. As with current law, brewers cannot sell any beverage they make.
The law's language has been ignored for decades, as homemade brewers and competition organizers say they didn't know about the transport ban. Several homebrew groups say the current law is archaic and hurts their beloved hobby.
What could go wrong with a down home law that lets home brewers share their creations?
AP: A fight is brewing in the Legislature over a proposal that seeks to make clear that home brewers don't necessarily have to brew and serve their booze at home. But opponents to the measure argued at a hearing before a state Assembly committee Wednesday that the bill would give home brewers too much freedom to bypass local ordinances when sharing brews.
After all the homebrew events that have taken place:
State law doesn't allowing homebrewed beer and wine to be taken outside of the home, which makes homemade brewing tasting events illegal.
Huh? So what are the objections? “Too much freedom” to
bypass what, a permit? How could that happen? Come on, get real here. This common sense bill…
…would make clear that home brewers could take what they make outside of their home. They would still be prohibited from selling what they make. Supporters say they just want to continue brewing and sharing their booze as they have for years.
I wouldn’t call beer or wine “booze,” but still, when it comes to this bill, how can you argue
with something so logical?
No comments:
Post a Comment